Joseph Martin, of Martinez, is shown in this police photograph in Concord on June 28, 2013. (Concord Police Department)

MARTINEZ -- A forensic computer analysis found child porn website history and suspicious searches on two desktop computers belonging to former Woodside Elementary School teacher Joseph Martin, a police electronic data expert testified Thursday in week four of the instructor's molestation trial.

Martin's defense attorney argued that websites such as Milkboys and Gayboystube could have reached Martin's computer through pop-ups and redirect websites that could send users to unintended pages.

Martin has pleaded not guilty to 150 counts of molestation involving 14 male former students. His attorney Patrick Clancy has argued that Martin was the victim of mass hysteria by students, parents and teachers.

In addition to the websites, Martin's computers showed image searches for such phrases as "boys swim" and "boys experimenting" conducted with the porn filter turned off on the Google search, the expert said. After being placed on administrative leave in 2013 but before his arrest, Martin used his home computer to search phrases such as: "What do they do with child molesters in prison?" and "Can police look at my internet history?" according to the forensic report.

Clancy highlighted other searches that asked about teachers being "falsely accused" and "child sex abuse defined."

Advertisement

Clancy also questioned lead Concord detective Tamra Roberts' training on conducting child sex abuse cases with high numbers of alleged victims, citing a penal code that requires specific training within six months. Roberts' supervisor testified that such training is hard to get in a short period of time and an investigator can still conduct probes while they wait to get the course.

Mount Diablo school district personnel chief Julie Braun Martin took the stand and was asked about the mystery 2002 letter written from a principal to Martin.

"If it did exist, it's a mystery as to why it's not in the personnel file," she said.

Letters of reprimand, according to union contract language, must remain permanently in a teacher's file, however they can be kept in a sealed file after four years. Martin had no sealed file. Clancy argued that contract language allows for non-disciplinary letters to be destroyed after two years.

Previous testimony described Martin as being "insistent" that the letter be destroyed, including a letter where Martin said he had an agreement with the letter's author, his former principal, to purge it.

Finally, three male, former students and a parent testified they never saw any inappropriate touching and raved about Martin as a teacher.